johnctharp wrote:
Do we have a maximum magnification number for it yet?
0.2x, or slightly worse than 100-400L, but better than 500/600L II and 200-400L. It must show the same % decrease in FL at mfd as the 100-400L, as it's almost the same magnification, with a 50% longer FL at 50% longer mfd.
Mark K wrote:
I have 100-400 L and love it. It works with a 1.4. However, for Nikon...I wish a similar lens. The 80-400 afs breathes a lot....reducing the effective telephoto focal length to 261 at minimal focal distance. So this is the fear of this Tamron 150-600. What if it breathes as well to say 300 mm at minimal focal distance. This can happen.
All zooms breathe a lot at mfd, some a worse than others. The 100-400L is closer to 330mm at mfd, so much better than the 80-400. Tamron is not too bad, my estimate is ~ 480mm.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
All zooms breathe a lot at mfd, some a worse than others. The 100-400L is closer to 330mm at mfd, so much better than the 80-400. Tamron is not too bad, my estimate is ~ 480mm.
I just thru the specs into a magnification calculator and that say its 375mm
Imagemaster wrote:
I could care less if it breathes at minimal focal distance.
Yeah, this lens is not a lens you would be using at MFD very often. This lens is used at infinity to try and capture distant subjects. I wouldn't buy this lens for anything else but that.
arbitrage wrote:
Yeah, this lens is not a lens you would be using at MFD very often. This lens is used at infinity to try and capture distant subjects. I wouldn't buy this lens for anything else but that.
I agree its not a lens your going to use at MFD much . But it would be good to find out how fast thru the focal distnance the lens gains most or all of its Focal Length . its not much good if its still not over 450mm at 50ft (just picking a mid range distance off the top of my head )
Or indeed how close to 600mm it really is at any distance .
i just enter in the MFD and the focal length and it gives the magnification you should get . then i just reduce the focal length until the magnification matches the Mag quoted in the specs .
its quite an eye opener to see how much ome lenses loose over others . even some macro lenses
what would be great would be to find the mag at other distances (which i guess the lens manufactures dont want us to know) then you could build up a better idea of how usefull 1 lens is over anotherat 'norma' shooting distances .
Thanks for those, downloaded the ones from Japan and they are looking very good in LR. The fox shot shows that the lens can resolve great detail at least when shot at closer distances in good light. Similar to the 100-400.
Looking at the image EXIFs I see that its reporting the lens' max aperture at f6.3. Do we think this lens will AF on bodies that only AF up to f5.6? Say, like the 7D? I don't have much experience with how 3rd party, slow lenses behave.
Not all the shots were taken with the 1Dx, just the Fukuda ones.
The first ones I looked at, #10,11, 14, 15 were shot with a 5Dmk3.
So there are a couple sets to compare here.
These look good so far. Sharpness looks good, bokeh is a mixed bag.
The original samples from the 5D3 look better to me, maybe they have better processing - no signs of CA, sharper, better contrast. The new Fukuda samples have more CA and less contrast.
I'm still much more excited about this lens now.
I'll put my pre-order in as soon as it's released.
Not all the shots were taken with the 1Dx, just the Fukuda ones.
The first ones I looked at, #10,11, 14, 15 were shot with a 5Dmk3.
So there are a couple sets to compare here.
These look good so far. Sharpness looks good, bokeh is a mixed bag.
The original samples from the 5D3 look better to me, maybe they have better processing - no signs of CA, sharper, better contrast. The new Fukuda samples have more CA and less contrast.
I'm still much more excited about this lens now.
I'll put my pre-order in as soon as it's released.
It weighs about a half pound more then my 70-200/1.4x combo that has half the reach. Seriously interested in this for a hand held long lens. The 1DX can make up for the stops.
First impressions compared to my, Canon 100-400 L:
-Not very reactive to 600 mm f/6.3 (development)
-Not bulky at all (without hand sun)
-Amazing results for stability has 600 mm of hands. (There was some light certe but I Choote to a dark corner)
-The noise? too much noise around to judge, I do not hear the focus while triggering the 6D without problem.
-Seems to be a lot of vignetting 600 mm.
Jeff Nolten wrote:
Looking at the image EXIFs I see that its reporting the lens' max aperture at f6.3. Do we think this lens will AF on bodies that only AF up to f5.6? Say, like the 7D? I don't have much experience with how 3rd party, slow lenses behave.
It's supposed to work, yes. Just like the Sigma 50-500 f4-f6.3 lens does work on the cameras that specify f5.6 lenses. I haven't seen technical explanations how it works, but someone else probably has. I guess it's something they write into the firmware on the lens.
Garylv wrote:
t's supposed to work, yes. Just like the Sigma 50-500 f4-f6.3 lens does work on the cameras that specify f5.6 lenses. I haven't seen technical explanations how it works, but someone else probably has. I guess it's something they write into the firmware on the lens.
Thanks Gary. I did some searching and found that Tamron and Sigma have a number of f6.3 lenses and didn't find anyone complaining that they would not AF. No confirmations that they would either. Just complaints that AF was slow at the long end.
